The tracker (July 2026)
This is the citable centerpiece. Every major creative-AI copyright case, its current status, what is at stake, and the next date to watch. Dated to the docket and primary reporting; nothing here is a final ruling on the core fair-use question unless it says so.
| Case | Domain | Status (Jul 2026) | What is at stake | Next / note |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disney, Universal & Warner Bros. v. Midjourney | Image / video | IN DISCOVERY C.D. Cal. 2:25-cv-05275 |
Whether generating studios' protected characters infringes; Midjourney claims fair use | Procedural date Aug 31, 2026. Full tracker |
| Andersen v. Stability AI, Midjourney, DeviantArt & Runway | Image (artists) | DISCOVERY, TRIAL SET N.D. Cal. 3:23-cv-00201 |
Artists' direct-infringement claims over training on their work; DMCA 1202 claims were dismissed | Trial set to begin Sep 8, 2026 |
| Getty Images v. Stability AI (UK) | Image | COPYRIGHT CLAIM REJECTED UK High Court, on appeal |
UK High Court rejected the secondary copyright claim (Nov 2025) but found limited trademark infringement; Getty is appealing | Appeal likely late 2026 / 2027 |
| Getty Images v. Stability AI (US) | Image | TRADEMARK CLAIMS ADVANCED N.D. Cal. |
US court let trademark, false-designation and unfair-competition claims proceed (Apr 2026) | Ongoing |
| Sony v. Suno / Sony v. Udio | Music | LITIGATING (FAIR USE) Massachusetts / SDNY |
Sony did not settle; fair-use ruling could set the precedent for AI music training | Pivotal ruling expected summer 2026. Music guide |
| Warner v. Suno | Music | SETTLED Late 2025 |
Multi-million settlement plus licensing partnership; avoids a precedent-setting ruling | Resolved (terms partly sealed) |
| Universal (UMG) v. Udio | Music | SETTLED Oct 2025 |
First major-label AI-music licensing template | Resolved |
| Thaler v. Perlmutter | Copyrightability | DECIDED SCOTUS cert denied |
Confirms pure AI output has no US copyright; human authorship required | Final (Mar 2, 2026). Copyright guide |
Sources: CourtListener (Disney v. Midjourney) · Variety · Andersen v. Stability (N.D. Cal., trial Sep 2026) · Paul Weiss (Getty v. Stability UK) · Sony v. Suno / Udio (fair-use, summer 2026) · CNBC (Thaler). Verified July 2026.
The big picture: three questions, three answers-in-progress
Is AI training fair use?
Unresolved in the US. The Midjourney, Andersen, and Sony cases are the ones most likely to answer it. No final ruling yet; the Sony music cases are closest.
Will the majors litigate or license?
Splitting. On the music side Warner and Universal settled into licensing deals; Sony chose to litigate. Settlements resolve disputes without setting precedent.
Can AI output be copyrighted?
Answered: no, for the purely AI-generated parts. The Supreme Court left the human-authorship rule in place in March 2026 (Thaler).
The core question, is training on copyrighted work fair use, is still unanswered in the US, and these cases are where it gets decided.The state of play
Image and video cases
The image fight is the loudest. Disney, Universal, and Warner Bros. v. Midjourney is the biggest studio-versus-AI case, currently in discovery, where Midjourney is pushing to force the studios to reveal their own AI use. Andersen v. Stability AI, Midjourney, DeviantArt, and Runway is the artists' class action; its DMCA Section 1202 claims were dismissed, but direct copyright-infringement claims are advancing, with a trial set to begin in September 2026. In the UK, Getty Images v. Stability AI produced the first major judgment: in November 2025 the High Court rejected Getty's secondary copyright claim while finding limited trademark infringement from Getty watermarks appearing in outputs, and Getty is appealing; a separate US Getty case advanced trademark claims in April 2026. Read the deep dive on the studio case in our Disney v. Midjourney tracker.
Music cases
Music is where settlements and litigation are splitting the majors. After the record labels sued the AI generators Suno and Udio, two of the three majors chose to settle rather than litigate to a verdict: Warner settled with Suno in late 2025, and Universal settled with Udio, each establishing an early licensing template. Sony has not settled with either and is litigating the fair-use question in Massachusetts and the Southern District of New York, with a pivotal ruling expected in summer 2026 that could set the precedent for AI music training. Which tools this makes safe to sell from is the subject of our AI music commercial-safety guide.
The copyrightability question
This one is settled. Separate from the training and infringement fights is the question of whether you can copyright AI output at all. On March 2, 2026, the US Supreme Court declined to hear Thaler v. Perlmutter, leaving in place the rule that US copyright requires a human author. Output generated from a prompt alone cannot be registered, though copyright can still attach to substantial human contributions. The full explanation is in is AI image output copyrightable.
The next big date: Sony v. Suno / Udio
Of all the pending cases, Sony's fair-use fight with the music generators is the one most likely to deliver a clear US ruling on whether training AI on copyrighted work is fair use, expected in summer 2026. We update this tracker the day a material ruling or settlement is reported. Subscribe below for the alert.
Recent moves (newest first)
Disney v. Midjourney procedural date, case remains in discovery.
Andersen v. Stability trial set to begin.
Sony v. Suno / Udio fair-use ruling expected, the likeliest clear US precedent.
Getty v. Stability (US) trademark and unfair-competition claims allowed to proceed.
SCOTUS denies cert in Thaler, locking in the human-authorship rule. CNBC
Getty v. Stability (UK) High Court rejects the copyright claim; Getty appeals. Warner settles with Suno.
Universal settles with Udio, the first major-label AI-music licensing template.
Get the AI Copyright Case Tracker alerts
One email the moment a material ruling or settlement drops in any of these cases, plus a one-page summary of what each outcome would mean for creators and AI tools. This is the fastest-moving area of the fine print.
Free. Only case-ruling and rights alerts. Unsubscribe anytime.
What all of this means for you
For a creator or business using these tools, none of these cases changes the rules today. They target the AI companies and, in some cases, outputs that reproduce specific protected works; they do not ban the tools or your right to sell original, non-infringing work. The practical rules are unchanged and worth repeating: do not generate recognizable copyrighted characters, trademarks, or real people for commercial use; remember most tools offer no indemnification; and know that pure AI output cannot be copyrighted, so your defensible value is in the human layer you add. What these cases will change, eventually, is how the tools are trained and licensed, which is why they are worth tracking. The practical playbooks are in our commercial-use guide and music-safety guide.
Frequently asked questions
What are the biggest AI copyright lawsuits in 2026?
In creative AI: Disney, Universal, and Warner Bros. v. Midjourney (image and video, in discovery); Andersen v. Stability AI, Midjourney, DeviantArt, and Runway (artists' class action, trial set for September 2026); Getty Images v. Stability AI (UK copyright claim rejected November 2025 and on appeal, US trademark claims advanced April 2026); and Sony's fair-use cases against Suno and Udio, with a ruling expected summer 2026. Separately, the Supreme Court declined Thaler v. Perlmutter in March 2026, locking in that pure AI output has no US copyright.
Has any court ruled that training AI is fair use?
Not definitively in the US for creative AI as of July 2026. The core question is still being litigated in the Midjourney, Andersen, and Sony cases with no final ruling. In the UK, the High Court in Getty v. Stability rejected the secondary copyright claim in November 2025, but that turned partly on jurisdictional and UK-specific points and is under appeal. The Sony v. Suno and Udio rulings expected in summer 2026 are among the most likely to give a clear US answer.
Which AI copyright cases have settled?
On the music side, Warner settled with Suno and Universal settled with Udio in late 2025, establishing early licensing templates. Sony has not settled with either and is litigating the fair-use question. Settlements resolve the parties' dispute without setting a precedent for everyone else, which is why the unsettled Sony cases carry outsized importance.
Can AI-generated art be copyrighted in 2026?
No, not the purely AI-generated parts. On March 2, 2026, the Supreme Court declined Thaler v. Perlmutter, leaving in place the rule that US copyright requires a human author, so prompt-only output cannot be registered. Copyright can still attach to substantial human contributions such as significant editing, arrangement, or original elements a person adds.
Does a lawsuit mean I cannot use these tools?
No. These suits target the AI companies and outputs that reproduce specific protected works; they do not ban the tools or your right to sell original, non-infringing work. Avoid generating recognizable copyrighted characters, trademarks, or real people for commercial use, and remember most tools offer no indemnification. The cases matter because their outcomes could reshape how the tools are trained and licensed.
Bottom line
As of July 2026, the central legal question of creative AI, whether training on copyrighted work is fair use, remains unanswered in the US, and the Midjourney, Andersen, and especially the Sony v. Suno and Udio cases are where it is likely to be decided, with a music ruling expected this summer. The music majors have split between settling (Warner, Universal) and litigating (Sony); the UK gave AI companies an early win in Getty v. Stability that is now on appeal; and the one thing that is settled is that pure AI output cannot be copyrighted. For users, nothing changes today: make original work, avoid recognizable protected material in anything you sell, and add a human layer you can defend. We keep this tracker current as each case moves. Go deeper in the Disney v. Midjourney tracker, the AI music safety guide, and is AI output copyrightable.
This article is educational information, not legal advice, and it summarizes active litigation whose facts and status change. We date and source every claim and re-verify as cases move, but confirm against the linked dockets and primary reporting, and consult a lawyer for your situation. Last reviewed: July 11, 2026.